Premium Member

And lots of it. They need to take the steering ratios out of the controller screen and place it in each car's menus. The very firstthing I noticed was that a single ratio is not enough for all the different cars (as you would guess) especially lacking a garage.

I think they should copy iRacing way of doing things in that department. Otherwise I was impressed by how well it drives and looks. From the graphic's standpoint, I was taken aback by this "shimmering" effect I see at the edges of the shadows and objects in medium range. I'll have to think about a better description for it.

And lots of it. They need to take the steering ratios out of the controller screen and place it in each car's menus. The very firstthing I noticed was that a single ratio is not enough for all the different cars (as you would guess) especially lacking a garage.

I think they should copy iRacing way of doing things in that department. Otherwise I was impressed by how well it drives and looks. From the graphic's standpoint, I was taken aback by this "shimmering" effect I see at the edges of the shadows and objects in medium range. I'll have to think about a better description for it.

Click to expand...

The steering rotation in the controller screen only affects the in-game steering animation. It has nothing to with "steering lock".

I'm going to verify this with the devs, but I believe the game adjusts to whatever rotation your wheel is set to.

I've experimented with 360, 540, 720, and 900. They all work perfect and feel the same, so I'm using 900.

Everyone keeps saying on the WMD forums try these settings or try those settings... Why? when none of them work .
Not to mention a lot of the suggestions are way off base from the norm as would be used in multiple's of over sim titles.

Seems to me there is a complete and fundamental flaw within the wheel/ffb files, and the way it conveys to the user and that it needs to be sorted as a matter of utmost and primary concern.

I want C.A.R.S the sim, Not NFS Shift the quasi sim.

I posted to the Devs @ WMD, that this should be the #1 priority as right now.... It's just not good.

Shift 2 was not based on GTR 2, why did you make that up? It is made by some of the same guys as GTR2 but GTR2 ran on the same engine as Rfactor, Shift 2 ran on a completely different engine (the same one that CARS runs on). Shift 2 felt completely different to GTR2 and was catered to gamepad users, it was not really a sim, it had a lot of controller issues with input lag, none of which was true about GTR2. Completely different games, completely different physics, completely different feel and look, worlds apart.

CARS 2 is essencially a stripped down Shift 2 and it has that feel about it, but otherwise it is very different, in a good way (you have to try it to understand). The input lag issues are still there (especially noticeable in the faster cars) and it is a problem that the devs are aware of, enough that they are going to redo it from the ground up to fix the problem.

Physics wise it has a lot of potential but as it is right now the cars have far far too much grip. An example is the Atom 300 (300bhp track car on road legal semi-slick tyres with no wings for downforce), at Bathurst I ran a laptime of 2:08.xx which is around the time of the lap record in a V8 Supercar, unless you haven't guessed but an Atom 300 should not even be able to run anywhere close to the time of a V8 Supercar, especially not on road legal tyres, with wonky input delay steering and an average driver behind the wheel.

CARS is shaping up to be an amazing game, if they can fix the input issues, whether it will actually be a sim is yet to be seen, but I think it "could" get there.

Since this could get awkward to look at, here's something I prepared earlier. I removed the top comment and opened both in winmerge, and it says:

Curious people will also find that the shocking differences between a shift chassis and a gtr2 chassis file involve re-arranging the extension letters from .hdc to .cdf, tyres from .tyr to .hdt, engines from ... oh wait, that's exactly the same, etcetera. Actual content differences are very minor (some renamed parameters, some new ones, some that are moved to different parts of the game). Even the terrain surface system uses about 80% identical named parameters with GTR2.

There is a lot of new and better stuff in there, but I'm curious what exactly your experience is here. Mine is that with some renamed file extensions you can literally port and drive Shift > GTR2 and GTR2 > Shift cars. How about you?

It runs on a different engine, it changes everything. iRacing with its obsession for using the real world numbers, amazingly doesnt feel the same as the real world by a long way, but the numbers are the same so it must be the same, right? iRacing is using a lot of the groundings built up from NASCAR 2003 and even GP Legends, yet it feels a lot different (atleast a lot different from GPL)

The guys behind Shift 2 and GTR2 are the same guys, so if they thought their numbers were right back then, then why would they be wrong now? That doesn't change the massive varience of other factors that play a part, the most important being the engine itself. Shift 2 felt nothing like GTR 2, GTR 2 felt like Rfactor (Because it runs on the same engine?). CARS does feel a lot like Shift 2, because it runs on the same engine, probably uses the same numbers again.

What you're saying is "Look these numbers are the same", what you're missing out is everything else that leads to why they are completely different. I only wish Shift 2 was the same as GTR 2, GTR 2 was a much better sim.

Ferrari Virtual Academy was individually developed for Ferrari, and is not compatable with NetKar Pro, but instantly the sim racing community knew that underneath FVA was NetKar Pro, even with the far superior graphics of FVA and the numbers specifically tuned for the F1 simulation, everybody instantly knew it was NetKar pro under the hood, same engine.

You can take the numbers from iRacing and put them into Rfactor, it will still feel and drive like Rfactor.

But by your logic this is totally impossible because rFactor used the exact same data, in a file called .hdv, and GTR2 used the exact same data, in a file called .hdc. See? Totally different!

In terms of "the whole engine" - yes obviously, many components stripped and replaced. But it's just forks. SimBin has "Lizard", Shift has "Gecko". The basic physics data other than the new tyre model and collision model are pretty much identical between them, with a grand total of exactly one renamed parameter to do with anything in the chassis, and a new tyre model (not an idle choice of words - same style of brush model that iRacing switched to later).

so if they thought their numbers were right back then, then why would they be wrong now?

Click to expand...

Interestingly enough, they don't regard GTR2 as "right", and Doug Arnao said as much months after the release. They tried and failed to completely eliminate bugs in the stock ISI tyre model which made grip levels drop too quickly (and you can see this same attempt taken further by looking at what was tried next in GTR Evolution). You can read Ian talking about the same thing again here. So, you know, just something to bear in mind if you are expecting CARS to somehow emulate your favourite bugs from GTR2. It's probably not in their plans. FYI Shift's tyre adjustment is called "subtle" in that post while the GTR2 version of the same is referred to as "falling off a cliff". Make your own judgement about what that might mean.